![]() |
|
Originally Posted by get there itis
(Post 1048775)
On a mainline flight, that should not have happened. The RS & OO pass riders should have been S3C.
Make sure to report it because I know there are agents who seem to like to manipulate the standby codes to get certain people on, at the expense of those who should have. |
Originally Posted by Columbia
(Post 1048848)
This sounds eerily familiar. We're only supposed to get a 3% raise and we used to be the highest paid and home of the pension. No expectations and lots to celebrate as everyone strives to be what you just did. Anything better than that and it will be a fantastic year. :D
|
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 1048741)
Bill, Please post the names of the reps and what exactly was said. I will be the first to call them out on it.
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 1048748)
What would you call them out on slow? Would you scold them about their lack of desire to achieve an industry leading contract? Or would you scold them for saying it publicly?
Carl Carl |
Originally Posted by Cycle Pilot
(Post 1048962)
This has happened to me a couple of times on my commute out of MSP. Once when I was deadheading and positive space. Agent put S3C's on the plane before me (S3). I was already on the plane when it happened so I couldn't confront the agent.
|
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 1048989)
Reposted since you don't seem to want to answer:
What would you "calling them out" actually consist of? Carl Here is what I want to see to even begin to believe this is more then a rumor. I went to the Council XX meeting on the XX Sept. The Captains reps XXXXX XXXXXXX stated that he was not in favor and did not feel we can achieve SWA payrates. Carl, Why has the above never happened? This rumor is much like the other rumor posted over and over again. DALPA is in secret negotiations to give away 100 seat scope for a 25, 30, 40, 50, or 60 percent raise. Been posted over and over since DPA started up. Never been a single discussion with the company on the issue. Not to mention that anyone who stopped to look at the cost of the pay raises compared to the cost savings of running the airplanes at DCI would quickly realize how stupid the rumor is. |
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 1048934)
|
Originally Posted by Ferd149
(Post 1048943)
http://crowdfusion.myspacecdn.com/me...ck-300x351.jpg Hey, 5 leg days to a 9.04 hour overnight to a 5:40am wheels up next morning is not acceptable. That's very regional of us. That I want to see changed in the next contract. |
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 1049009)
Here I am driving out of the airport posting on APCF...
http://crowdfusion.myspacecdn.com/me...ck-300x351.jpg Hey, 5 leg days to a 9.04 hour overnight to a 5:40am wheels up next morning is not acceptable. That's very regional of us. That I want to see changed in the next contract. |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 1049038)
Remember that every time you make a change in the contract it has unintended effects. We worked for and got a 8 hours behind the door rule in the current contract. The rule however leads to more 30 hour layovers on domestic trips and overall low time trips. I don't advocate one over the other just that you keep in mind that for every action there is a reaction. We can get longer layovers but it may come at the risk of lower time trips.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:49 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands